Euthanasia continues to go out of control in Canada

 

The number of euthanasia cases continues to rise in Canada, according to the latest official report on the topic, raising further alarm, particularly among disability rights groups. Even some early supporters of ‘Medical Assistance in Dying’ (MAID) are now voicing concerns.

Last year, 15,343 Canadians died by euthanasia or assisted suicide, according to the ‘Fifth Annual Report on Medical Assistance in Dying’. This marks a 15.8pc increase over 2022 and represents 4.7pc of all deaths in 2023. Since its legalisation in 2016, there have been 60,301 cases of assisted suicide and euthanasia cases in Canada that we know of.

Adding to these frightening figures, 2,906 individuals died last year before their euthanasia requests could be fulfilled. Meanwhile, 496 individuals withdrew their requests.

Canada allows both assisted suicide, where the patient self-administers lethal drugs (except in Quebec), and euthanasia, which is administered by a doctor or nurse. Self-administration is extremely rare, with fewer than five cases reported last year, showing that people are scared to take a poison themselves.

Dementia was cited as a medical condition in 241 euthanasia recipients in 2023, and in 106 of these cases, dementia was their sole condition.

Not all those who received euthanasia were terminally ill. In 622 cases, natural death was not deemed “reasonably foreseeable.” This category, called Track 2, allows euthanasia for non-terminal patients. Some could have lived for a decade or longer but chose euthanasia due to isolation or feeling like a burden. Euthanasia can be requested when someone experiences “physical or psychological suffering that is intolerable to them.” This is another example of the slippery slope in action.

Isolation or loneliness was significantly more common among Track 2 patients (47.1pc) compared to Track 1 patients (those within six months of death) at 21.1pc, but we can still see feeling isolated was significant. Crucially, 45.1pc of Track 1 and 49.2pc of Track 2 patients cited feeling like a “burden on family, friends or caregivers” as a key reason for their suffering.

Among Track 2 recipients, where death was not foreseeable, women constituted 58.5pc of cases. These patients were typically younger and had lived with their conditions for much longer. Perhaps this is also a function of the fact that women typically live longer than men and are more likely to be widowed and therefore living alone.

The percentage of disabled individuals among non-terminal euthanasia recipients was significantly higher: 58.3pc compared to 33.5pc among those within six months of death. They are heavily over-represented in Canada’s euthanasia statistics.

“When other people express loneliness or a loss of dignity or a desire to die, we usually respond with support or prevention. But with people with disabilities, we respond with an offer for MAID,” said Isabel Grant, a law professor at the University of British Columbia.

This same group of non-terminal patients had, on average, lived with a disability for a fifth of their lifespan.

According to the report, 594 individuals received euthanasia under a waiver of final consent arrangement due to a loss of capacity. This means they were euthanised based on a prior request, even though they could no longer give consent.

Euthanasia was legalised in Canada in 2016 following a case brought by the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA). However, the regime has become so permissive that even the BCCLA has raised concerns, particularly about euthanasia for prisoners and disabled individuals. The organisation has highlighted reports of people accessing MAID due to intolerable social circumstances or being offered it in cases that may not meet legal requirements.

“Of particular concern are reports of MAID being used in prisons while incarcerated individuals were shackled to their beds, the programme’s lack of legal oversight, disproportionate representation of impoverished people receiving assisted suicide, and healthcare practitioners offering MAID when patients sought support for living,” the BCCLA stated.

In Europe last year, deaths outnumbered births by 1.2 million

 

New figures from Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union, confirm the growing demographic crisis facing Europe. Last year, deaths across the EU outnumbered births by almost 1.2m, and this is only going to get worse. Births have not outnumbered deaths since 2012.

This is a consequence of fertility rates being well below replacement level across the continent and in some cases for decades.

At the beginning of 2023, according to Eurostat, there were 448.8 million people living in the European Union. The only reason this is little different from 20 years ago is because of immigration.

The average number of births per 1,000 persons living in the EU has dropped from 10.6 in 2008 to 8.7 in 2022.

One way of analysing fertility trends is to look at how many babies are born to mothers aged 40 and older compared to all babies born in a year. It shows the degree to which people are delaying having children.

In Ireland in 2022, 11.2pc of all births in 2022 were to mothers aged 40 and over, the highest in Europe. This has soared from 3.4pc in 2002.

Across the EU, the figure was 6pc in 2022, meaning many women in Ireland are waiting a particularly long time to have children, for whatever reason.

The proportion of births to mothers aged at least 40 in the EU as a whole was 2.2pc in 2002.

In Ireland, the mean age of first-time mothers is the third highest in Europe, at 31.5 years. The EU average is 29.7 years.

Ireland used to have the highest fertility rate in the EU – 1.97 births per woman in 2002 – but now it has decreased significantly. The current value (1.56) is slightly higher than the European average (1.46) but way below what is needed to ensure a natural balance between births and deaths, which is 2.1 births per woman.

Among EU countries, France has currently the highest total fertility rate (1.79), followed by Romania (1.71) and Bulgaria (1.65). The lowest rates were found in Malta (1.08), Spain (1.16) and Italy (1.24).

While the population is growing, due to immigration and people are living longer, there are ever fewer young people.

In the last 20 years, the percentage of people aged 0 to 19 years of age across the EU declined from 22.6pc to 20.1pc. Over the same period, the share of persons aged 65 and over increased in all EU countries 16.2 to 21.3.

Over the past twenty years, the Irish population grew by a massive 32.9pc, from 3.7 million in 2003 to 5.27 million last year. Much of this is immigration-driven. To put this into perspective, the total population of the EU increased by only 4pc during the same period.

In Ireland, births still outnumber deaths, although the gap between the two has halved in the last ten years. In due course, given our low fertility rate, deaths will outnumber births as elsewhere.

The European demographic crisis, which is already here, will affect Ireland as well, even before ours hits us directly, simply because our fate is so tied to Europe’s in multiple ways. It is time we began to have a serious discussion in Ireland about this topic.

Will we ever have an honest discussion about divorce in Ireland?

 

Divorce will affect children for the rest of their lives, well into adulthood, but people don’t want to hear this because it makes them feel bad about their decisions, says Spectator columnist, writer and broadcaster, Bridget Phetasy.

A piece she wrote a few months ago titled “How divorce never ends”, is based on her personal experience and presents the lifelong impact of parental break-up on children. It caused a huge reaction, for and against. Those who supported the article were themselves usually children of divorce. Those who reacted angrily were often the parents who exhibited great defensiveness about what they had done, even though Phetasy was at pains to say parental separation, for example when the relationship is abusive, is justified.

Phetasy (née Walsh), whose parents divorced when she was 12, recounts how her life and that of her future husband – also a child of divorce – were upended. Their school achievements declined, and they fell into rebellious behaviours. The logistical challenges of splitting time between parents, with cross-country travel and fractured holiday traditions, contributed to instability and neglect. Lacking proper supervision, the children often resorted to reckless behaviour.

“So often it feels like two people are just ‘over it’ [meaning the parents] and want to move on with their lives and be single again instead of doing whatever it takes to make it work for the kids. People don’t want to hear this because it makes them feel bad about their decisions. Divorce sucks. It never ends and it should be a last resort”, she wrote.

Phetasy – a former columnist for Playboy magazine, of all things, – is now a mother and uses her parents’ shortcomings as a guide for what not to do.

“Before I had a kid, I asked people who came from similar backgrounds how they managed to raise great, well-adjusted kids. They always said the same thing: “I just did the opposite of what my parents did.’”, she writes in her piece.

She argues that divorce is too often treated casually, with little regard for its profound and enduring impact on children.

She admits harbouring lasting anger and grief over her parents’ prioritisation of new relationships over their children’s well-being. These feelings persist into adulthood, particularly as the complexities of managing relationships with multiple sets of grandparents now affect her own family.

Talking to the feminist podcaster Louise Perry, she recalls the reactions from readers of the piece and also from followers of her YouTube channel.

“People lie to themselves about how hard it is on the kids. There’s this lie: kids are resilient, they’ll be fine. It was heartbreaking reading the initial flow of comments that came in.  First you get the flood of people who feel seen and heard and validated. “Thank you so much this was my experience. I felt I this brought up so many emotions of my own”, and then you get the backlash and the people misinterpreting you and taking it out of context”, she told in the interview.

Commenting on Bridget Phetasy’s article, Louise Perry noticed that the consideration of what is a truly valid reason for divorce often leads to exaggeration of issues, while many overlook the long-term impact on their children, whose lives will be shaped by the decision for decades to come.

The majority of break-ups occur in low-conflict marriages, where the impact on children is often more profound due to the unexpected and therefore more traumatic nature of the separation. In such cases, it is usually in the best interest of the children for the parents to remain together.

2025 will mark 30 years from the divorce referendum in Ireland, where now over 320,000 adults are today divorced or separated and hundreds of thousands of children affected. This anniversary will surely be celebrated with enthusiasm, but a mature assessment will consider the voices of people like Bridget Phetasy who have suffered because of their parents’ decisions.

Lessons so far from the British ‘assisted dying’ debate

The assisted suicide bill regrettably passed its second reading in the UK House of Commons last week, with 330 MPs voting in favour and 275 against. Among Labour MPs, 58pc supported the bill, as did 60pc of Reform Party representatives, while only 19pc of Conservative MPs backed it. On the plus side, more Labour MPs voted against than had once been predicted and perhaps the bill can be defeated, or at least watered down at a later stage. It intends to allow those within six months of death to end their own lives via a doctor-prescribed poison.

The bill will now move to the committee stage for detailed scrutiny before returning to the Commons for a third reading, expected in April.

Supporters of the bill have used euphemistic language, such as the term “assisted dying”, misleading the public and obscuring the fact that a person is ending their own life, which is suicide.

During the parliamentary debate, a Labour representative objected to the use of the word “suicide”, as offensive and incorrect. Danny Kruger, a Tory MP and prominent opponent of the bill, replied that one of its effect was to amend the Suicide Act.

This tactic of changing the language using neutral or positive words has been central to the campaign led by groups like Dignity in Dying, formerly the Voluntary Euthanasia Society, which frames the bill as a compassionate choice that ensures dignity for terminally ill patients. Euphemisms manipulate public perception and mask the bill’s potential risks. A recent survey showed that support for the bill goes significantly down when respondents are correctly explained what “assisted dying” really means. Many confuse it with palliative care.

Another misleading tactic is the denial of the slippery slope effect, i.e. that the restrictions for accessing assisted suicide or euthanasia are gradually lifted with time, as it has happened in other countries.

Deputy Leadbeater, said on BBC radio that “once the bill is passed, it cannot be changed”.

This false claim was repeated by the Economist magazine: “some cannot shake the fear that Ms Leadbeater’s law would be a slippery slope. If they mean that the criteria would sneakily be broadened to include the mentally ill or disabled without further legislation, then the facts are against them. In no case has an assisted-dying law restricted to the terminally ill expanded in this way”.

But it is undeniable that every piece of legislation can be changed in the future, by politicians or by courts. In many states with assisted suicide laws, the courts have re-interpreted those laws to broaden the grounds more than legislators envisaged. Moreover, one of the effects of legalising assisted suicide/euthanasia is the change in social attitudes towards the practices, which in turn stirs further changes in the law.

We also that the campaign for assisted suicide has been bolstered by plenty of money.

For example, in the London Underground, where at least one suicide attempt occurs every week, lots of posters were on display including one showing a woman dancing in the kitchen alongside the words: “My dying wish is my family won’t see me suffer. And I won’t have to.” These highly insensitive billboards were later covered with posters promoting the Samaritans helpline.

Deputy Kim Leadbeater, who sponsored this bill, is the Chair of More in Common UK. This network is supported by organisations like the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the Open Society Foundations, led by George Soros, which have a long history of promoting population control initiatives. Will we see something similar happening here? With a new Government due to be agreed after last week’s election, assisted suicide and euthanasia are sure to be somewhere in the programme for the new Dail.

Sono poeta

 

Sono poeta (U. Bottoni)

Allor lento io vagando, ad una, ad una

                                                            Palpo le piaghe onde la rea fortuna,

                                                            E amore, e il mondo hanno il mio core aperto.

                                                                                                            UGO FOSCOLO.

In quei momenti che la barca mia,

S’arena sopra il mare de la vita,

Quando più oscura ne divien la via

E sitibonda mugghia l’acqua ardita,

 

Quando la mente fugge nel mistero                                    5

E sol rimane la realtá crudele,

Quando ne’ spazi vagola ’l pensiero

E provo del dolor l’acerbo fiele,

 

Sento una voce allora mugolante

Che irridendo nel cor vibra secreta                                    10

E mi ripete in quel penoso istante

«Tu non hai vena, tu non sei poeta!»

Auro d'Alba, 1906.

Some surprising opposition to England’s ‘assisted dying’ bill

On Friday, the UK House of Commons will vote on a bill by a Labour MP to introduce assisted suicide in England and Wales. Some interesting opposition to it has emerged.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has said a whip would not apply and Labour party members could “vote their conscience”, but some important members of his Cabinet and also other Labour MPs have expressed concerns.

The most prominent opponent is the former Prime Minister Gordon Brown who said that the early loss of his daughter Jennifer, who lived only eleven days, taught him that the focus should be on the improvement of palliative care.

“An assisted dying law, however well intended, would alter society’s attitude towards elderly, seriously ill and disabled people, even if only subliminally, and I also fear the caring professions would lose something irreplaceable – their position as exclusively caregivers”, he wrote in an opinion piece for the Guardian.

The bill pertains only England and Wales, while Scotland is considering its own legislation. Brown is Scottish.

At least five cabinet ministers will vote against the proposed bill, including the Deputy Prime Minister Angela Ryner, who has opposed similar legislation in the past.

Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, has raised concerns that the bill could pressure terminally ill patients to end their lives to save NHS resources, potentially leading to a “chilling” scenario where financial considerations influence patient choices.

Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, has also indicated her opposition. “I feel that once you cross that line, you’ve crossed it forever. If it just becomes the norm that at a certain age or with certain diseases, you are now a bit of a burden… that’s a really dangerous position to be in”, she said.

Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson, suggested there were not enough safeguards in the Bill.

Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, has also stated his opposition to the proposed legislation. “Constituents will know in the past I have always voted against proposals to change the law in this way. This is mainly because I have profound concerns about how vulnerable people could be protected should this happen”, Reynolds wrote on Facebook.

As of today, eight members of the UK Cabinet have publicly declared their intention to vote in favour of the assisted suicide bill.

Another leading Labour figure to come out against the bill is the major of London, Sadiq Khan.

The Conservative Party’s leadership has also permitted a free vote on the bill, enabling MPs to decide based on their individual convictions. This approach reflects the deeply personal nature of the issue and acknowledges the diverse opinions within the party.

Three former Conservative Prime Ministers – Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Theresa May –  have stated they will vote against the proposal.

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales has actively campaigned against the bill. In 2024, Cardinal Vincent Nichols issued a pastoral letter urging Catholics to oppose the legislation, warning that it could shift medical duty from care to the facilitation of death.

New report shows anti-Christian persecution is getting worse

Persecution of Christians around the world has increased further over the past two years from already high levels, according to a new report from Aid to the Church in Need (ACN).

The problem has worsened not only in individual countries but across continents and is one of the most under-reported forms of persecution in the world today despite being so vast in scope.

The “Persecuted and Forgotten? Report 2024” provides an extensive overview of the persecution of Christians globally, analysing conditions in 18 countries from August 2022 to June 2024.

More than 60pc of the countries surveyed have witnessed deteriorating conditions for Christians, with significant threats identified in parts of Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Latin America.

The report notes that the epicentre of Islamist militant aggression has moved from the Middle East to Africa. Countries like Burkina Faso, M
ozambique, and Nigeria have faced severe attacks on Christians, including mass killings, abductions, and forced displacement.

“Over a hundred thousand Christians were among the many who fled for their lives 10 years ago when ISIS seized vast swathes of Iraq’s Nineveh Plains. For years since they have lived like refugees in their own country, helped only by their fellow believers around the world – including substantial help from Aid to the Church in Need”, says the Chaldean Archbishop of Erbil in Iraq, Bashar Warda, in the foreword to the report.

He adds: “Christians in other countries are today facing jihadist extremism, whether in Burkina Faso or Mozambique – and equally bitter is the oppression of believers by authoritarian regimes like China or Nicaragua”.

In Burkina Faso, jihadist groups control 40pc of the territory, targeting Christian women with sexual violence. Similar patterns were noted in Mozambique and Nigeria, where Boko Haram and Fulani militants orchestrated massacres during Christian holidays.

Totalitarian regimes such as China, Iran, and North Korea have intensified crackdowns on religious practices. China enforces “sinicisation”, compelling Christian leaders to align with Communist ideology, while Iran has escalated arrests and harassment of Christian converts. In North Korea, Christians face brutal punishments, including imprisonment and torture.

The report highlights Nicaragua as an alarming example of rising authoritarianism attacking religious freedom in Latin America. The Ortega-Murillo leftist regime has targeted the Catholic Church with severe measures, including the expulsion of clergy; the closure of Church-run institutions, such as schools and charities; the confiscation of Church property and the restrictions on religious activities, including public celebrations like processions during Holy Week.

The government has increased surveillance of Catholic parishes, harassing and intimidating clergy and laypeople. It has also closed the Vatican’s embassy and suspended diplomatic ties with the Holy See.

In India and Pakistan, the report reports heightened attacks under the guise of anti-conversion laws and blasphemy accusations. Hindu nationalism in India has led to over 700 attacks on Christians in 2023 alone, with churches destroyed and believers forcibly displaced. In Pakistan, abductions and forced conversions of Christian women remain prevalent.

Archbishop Warda emphasises the urgency of global intervention to prevent further attacks on Christians.

“Our prayer is that those reading this report, whether governments or others with influence, will do more than just pay lip service to reports of Christian persecution; they must match their words with action – clear and decisive policy commitment – to help those whose only crime is the Faith they profess”, he says.

Here is a link to an interview with Michael Kelly from ACN about the report.

How marriage protects against depression

A major new study shows that unmarried individuals are much more likely to experience depression than those who are married. The study looks at seven different countries, including Ireland.

The research revealed that unmarried individuals - including those who are single, divorced, separated, or widowed - exhibit significantly higher risks of depressive symptoms compared to those who are married. Specifically, the analysis found that unmarried status is associated with an overall 86pc higher risk of depressive symptoms. This increased risk appears particularly pronounced among divorced or separated individuals (99pc). It is instead 79pc higher in single and 64pc in widowed individuals, when compared to married people. 

The study involved over 100,000 participants. The other countries examined along with Ireland were the United States, the United Kingdom, Mexico, South Korea, China and Indonesia.

In Ireland, the risk of depression was notably higher for divorced or separated individuals, who faced a 160pc increased risk, and for widowed individuals, who had a 115pc increased risk, compared to their married counterparts. In other word, for every 100 married individuals experiencing depressive symptoms, in Ireland there would be approximately 260 divorced or separated individuals and 215 widowed individuals experiencing similar symptoms.

The research suggests that marriage provides protective mental health benefits, possibly through mechanisms such as emotional and social support, economic stability, and the positive influence spouses can have on each other’s well-being.

Importantly, the study also highlights that the association between marital status and depression is influenced by demographic and cultural variables. The authors suggest that the more pronounced link in Western countries, including Ireland, reflect cultural differences in social expectations and support systems surrounding marriage. “Eastern cultures tend to tolerate higher levels of emotional distress before it becomes problematic, which may partially explain the lower risk of depressive symptoms in unmarried participants from these countries”, they say. The authors admit that further research is needed to understand the observed cultural differences.

Gender and education level influence in the relationship between marital status and depression. The study found that unmarried men are 25pc more likely to experience depressive symptoms than unmarried women. This risk was even higher among single men (48pc) while the research did not observe a significant difference between men and women among divorced/separated or widowed.

“Females tend to have larger and stronger social support networks than males, particularly among never-married individuals”, the authors note.

Additionally, those with higher educational attainment showed a greater likelihood of depression when unmarried compared to those with lower educational levels. This could reflect variations in social expectations and pressures, where individuals with higher education may feel a stronger sense of isolation or failure if they remain unmarried.

In conclusion, this study reinforces the link between marital status and depression, expanding previous understandings by including a more diverse global sample. Marriage, as highlighted by this research, provides significant mental health benefits, reducing the risk of depressive symptoms. It offers emotional support, economic stability, and shared responsibilities, fostering resilience against stress. These are all good reasons why marriage should be promoted and strengthen in public policy and legislation.

Some good and bad pro-life news from the US elections

 

In this week’s US election, citizens voted not only in the presidential and two congressional elections but also in numerous referendums, including several on pro-life issues. In three states, attempts to make abortion laws more liberal were rejected, while seven states passed pro-choice ballot measures.

The most significant pro-life victory occurred in Florida, where an effort to extend the legal abortion limit from 6 to 24 weeks of gestation did not reach the required quota of 60pc of the vote.

Pro-life advocates, led by Governor Ron DeSantis, successfully blocked Amendment 4, a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at establishing a “right” to abortion. The amendment would also have allowed abortions after 24 weeks for “health reasons”, which are always vague, like in Britain.

If passed, Amendment 4 would have nullified Florida’s current six-week abortion limit and potentially override parental consent requirements, threatening parental rights.

Despite over $40 million in support from out-of-state pro-abortion organisations, the amendment fell three short of the 60pc threshold needed to pass constitutional amendments in the state.

Pro-life advocates celebrated significant wins also in Nebraska and South Dakota, as voters rejected proposed constitutional amendments aimed at expanding abortion access.

Nebraska had two papers on the ballot. The current law prohibits abortions after the first trimester (12 weeks), except for medical emergencies or cases related to rape or incest.

An attempt to lift the 12-week limit was rejected by voters, while they approved by 55pc a competing ballot measure to enshrine the current limit not only in legislation but also in the state constitution.

In South Dakota abortion is banned except to save the life of the mother. A constitutional right to abortion was opposed by 58.6pc of voters.

These results are extremely important for the prolife movements. In 2022, the Supreme Court found that there is no right to abortion in the US Constitution, and left every state to regulate this issue in its constitutions or in legislation. In the meantime, the pro-life side has lost one vote after another, until the various referendums this week.

Another important pro-life victory was achieved in West Virginia, where voters approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit assisted suicide and euthanasia. They were already illegal but now the ban is now in the state constitution.

Unfortunately, radical pro-choice amendments passed in seven states.

Colorado voted to create a ‘right’ to abortion in the state constitution and allowing the use of public funds for it. Its law was already one of the most extreme as it does not restrict abortion after a specific point in a pregnancy. Babies can be killed up to birth. In 2020, voters rejected an initiative that would have banned abortions after 22 weeks.

A similarly radical amendment passed with a large support (61.5pc) in the state of New York, where abortion is already allowed up to birth.

In Maryland, Montana and Nevada, where abortion is already legal up to viability (24 weeks), voters added a new article to the Constitution’s Declaration of Rights establishing a “right to reproductive freedom”.

Missouri voters also made abortion ‘a fundamental right’ to its Constitution by a small margin (51.7pc). The pro-choice campaign spent almost $29 million compared to a mere $1.3 million of pro-life side.

In Arizona, where abortion is legal for any reasons up to 15 weeks of gestation, 61pc of voters supported an amendment to the state constitution establishing that the state may not interfere with ‘the fundamental right’ to abortion before the point of foetal viability.

These result show how radical the pro-choice movement has become in the US. They always push the limits and, even when the law has no gestational limits to abortion, they push it to make a ‘fundamental constitutional right’.

These recent pro-life victories are encouraging but the disappointing results in many states show that fight for the right to life is far from over.

“They can have an abortion every month if they want”

 

A recent study by two pro-choice academics provides interesting insights into the GPs who offer abortion services in Ireland. Those GPs, while fully in favour of abortion, nonetheless have reservations about some of what they are seeing, and in particular about women who have had multiple abortions in a relatively short time.

Very revealingly, when one doctor raised concerns about women having multiple abortions, someone from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), which is a big abortion provider, accused the doctor of being ‘judgemental’, and said women should be able to have an abortion every month if they want.

The research, published by two members of the Law School at University College Cork (UCC), is based on interviews with 15 doctors, most of whom are part of START (Southern Task-force on Abortion and Reproductive Topics), a network of pro-choice healthcare professionals.

According to the study, a key motivation for participating in providing abortions is “respect for human rights, women’s rights, and equality.” ‘Dr H’ (all names are anonymised) stated: “I’m a very great believer in bodily autonomy and the rights of the individual.”

Some of these doctors were politically active in campaigns to repeal the Eighth Amendment. However, the anonymous interviews reveal that even among strong pro-choice advocates, there are reservations about aspects of the work they are doing.

‘Dr P’ told the researchers: “I think it’s important to acknowledge that we’ve made a decision that a woman should be able to have an abortion if she wants one and, big deal, you shouldn’t have to justify it or beg for one. But at the same time, like I remember, I had one girl, a student, and she had three abortions in 18 months. And I remember thinking, you know, that’s not what I voted yes for.”

It should be noted that the study is written from a distinctly pro-choice perspective. It was partially funded by the Irish Family Planning Association, and one of its authors is a member of the Abortion Working Group of the National Women’s Council of Ireland. Only selected responses from the interviews are published, and we do not have access to the complete data, yet these selected quotes reveal some hesitations.

Another doctor, referred to as ‘Dr O’R’, remarked: “You know, I have had five who’ve had three [abortions]. Four or five women for three. And when we’re talking in our group, we get quite paternalistic saying, ‘Jesus, throw the Implanon [a long-term form of contraception] into her.’ And when we had BPAS over, they were saying, ‘How dare you be so judgemental? She can have a termination every month if she wants.’ Still, you know, the medic part of me goes, ‘God—surely that’s tough on her,’ you know, but yeah—how do you reconcile that?”

Unlike other countries, Ireland collects almost no data on women undergoing terminations, so it is unclear how many have had more than one abortion but this study confirms that this is not uncommon here.

The interviews also reveal tensions within GP practices between those who provide abortion services and those who do not. “Yeah, I’m probably known as the baby killer, but no, all nicely. Some of my very best friends and colleagues absolutely refuse to do this. They will remain my best friends. You know, I don’t do toenails. I send them up to my colleague. He sends me, you know… so we, you know, I think we’re all over it,” said ‘Dr O’R’.

Some participants in the study admitted they do not discuss their involvement in providing abortion services with family members or acquaintances. ‘Dr B’ stated: “I would say there’s very few people who would talk openly about the fact that they provide that service in a social setting because they just don’t know who’s there and what their view is going to be. And that’s actually a stigma, like, that is actually, you know, a stigma that you’re carrying.”

The report by Marie O’Shea on abortion services in Ireland estimates that around 90pc of Irish GPs do not participate in offering these services. This new study suggests that even those who are involved may struggle to reconcile their ideological commitment with the realities they face in practice.

Il furto

Candelabri di stelle
sulla piazza remota
come un' immensa basilica vuota 
La croce enorme col Cristo
(unico segno di veglia)
sorveglia
la fontana di Papa Sisto.
Le quattro strade assorte
camminano fin sulle porte
della città sgominata.
Assediata?
Messa a fuoco?
Abbandonata?
Il gobbo - unico cittadino
reperibile
fece dalla soglia capolino
e si avanzò - stampellando
sulle gambe contorte
di contrabbando.
Corsero brividi d'orrore
su tutte le porte ...
bendate
dalle gelide mani della sera ...
Il gobbo raggiunse la croce
nel centro della piazza
e a colpi di zappa la svelse
dalla terra scavata di recente.
Poi se la caricò sulle spalle
con tutto il suo Cristo
sanguinolento
si segnò con l'acqua di Papa Sisto
e disparve
fra i capelli discinti dell'ultima luna.
All'alba gli abitanti
della cittadella risorta
morirono d'orrore sugli sbocchi
della minuscola piazza.
Dalla croce pendeva
incoronato di spine
il piccolo gobbo mago
con un sogghigno di lago
sulle labbra paonazze.

da Baionette (1915)

Just how many people are really atheists?

 

A recent survey has found that, for the first time, atheists in the UK outnumber those who believe in God. Or do they? Because an awful lot depends on exactly what people are asked.

The “Explaining Atheism” project is a global research initiative led by Queen’s University Belfast and recently released interim findings appearing to show that atheism is now more widespread than theism in the UK.

The study surveyed approximately 25,000 individuals across six countries, including Brazil, China, Denmark, Japan, the UK, and the USA. It draws upon data from the British Social Attitudes Survey, the World Values Survey, and an earlier project by the same team, “Understanding Unbelief” (2017-2021).

According to the British Social Attitudes Survey (BSAS), belief in God in the UK dropped from 41.8 pc in 2008 to 37.4 pc in 2018. During the same period, the percentage of people who say they do not believe in God rose from 35.2 pc to 43pc.

However, a survey conducted by the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) put the number of atheists in Britain at 26pc, not 43pc.

Why the difference? It seems to come down to how the question is asked. The BSAS asked people point-blank whether they believed in God or not. But the ISSP asked a wider range of questions from emphatic atheism to emphatic theism and everything in between.

A similar phenomenon was observed in Ireland, where the wording of the Census 2022 question “What is your religion?” was modified to “What is your religion, if any?” The first response option was “no religion”, whereas this had been the last option in the 2016 Census. This change led to a big increase in “no religion” responses. No surprise there.

Prof. Stephen Bullivant, a sociologist of religion at St Mary’s University in London, noted that in some countries, the term ‘atheist’ carries a degree of stigma, and people may avoid identifying as such, even if they do not believe in God or practice any religion. Conversely, in other cultures, atheism or secularity has become the norm, leading respondents to self-identify as atheists, even if they still hold some belief in God.

Interestingly, the “Explaining Atheism” study also found that “non-belief in God does not necessarily rule out belief in other supernatural phenomena, as most atheists and agnostics express some type of supernatural belief.”

By the way, the findings indicate that belief, or non-belief, in God is predominantly influenced by socialisation, rather than by factors such as education, fear of death, or a need for structure. Parental upbringing and societal expectations about religion were identified as the most significant factors. For instance, those not exposed to religious practise by their parents during childhood were more likely to identify as atheists.

In other words, we are very conventional. If the broad social convention is religious, then we are more likely to be religious, and if the convention is broadly secular, we are more likely to be secular, or even atheistic. We don’t seem to think as much about our beliefs as we might like to imagine.

Extreme euthanasia agenda revealed at Irish conference

Last month, End of Life Ireland hosted the 2024 international conference of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies, which pro-euthanasia campaigners from around the world attended.  Several speakers at the conference made no secret of their wish to see euthanasia and assisted suicide permitted on very broad grounds indeed, far beyond the terminally ill.  They are not even trying to hide the slippery slope.

On 17th October, the Dáil will vote on the Report of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Assisted Dying, which recommends both euthanasia and assisted suicide for patients with an incurable and irreversible condition. We can already see the ambition of campaigners to go much further than this.

Speakers at the conference included Justin McKenna and Jane Lazer of End of Life Ireland. When they appeared before the Oireachtas Committee, they expressed a wish that euthanasia and assisted suicide be made available on broad grounds. They clearly stated their aim to extend assisted suicide to include patients suffering from conditions such as dementia and multiple sclerosis. Some of what they had to say can be found here.

Another speaker was Colin Brewer. He is worth noting because he was struck off the medical register in Britain in 2006 for serious professional misconduct. According to The Guardian, he had provided “patients with a lethal cocktail of drugs that led to the death of one and the development of further addictions in several others”.

Later, Brewer revealed that between 2013 and 2016 he had helped six British patients with dementia to end their lives at assisted suicide clinics in Switzerland, despite none of these patients being terminally ill. Although Brewer was no longer licensed to practise in Britain, he nonetheless assessed these patients’ mental capacity to choose death before their trips abroad.

Why did the Irish speakers seem happy to share a platform with him?

Brewer is an advocate for euthanasia not only for those suffering from dementia but also for “patients with motor neurone disease, stroke and other intractable and/or progressive conditions don’t want to face years of intolerable quality of life.”

At the Dublin conference, Brewer’s presentation was titled: “Most people considering MAID (medically assisted death) for early dementia aren’t ‘depressed’, they are understandably unhappy.” His panel also featured a presentation titled “Dementia as part of the end of life conversation,” and on the same day, two Canadian activists spoke about “Glimpses into dementia and assisted dying”.

Five of the six patients assessed by Brewer ended their lives at the Dignitas clinic in Zurich.

Silvan Luley, a representative of Dignitas, also spoke at the conference. His talk, “Assistance for the right to choose the time and manner of one’s end of life – Beyond terminal”, underscored that Dignitas offers assisted suicide not only for terminally ill patients but also for those with “unbearable pain”, which is defined entirely at the discretion of the person seeking to die.

When Luley presented at the Joint Oireachtas Committee, last year, he noted that less than half of those who die at Dignitas are terminally ill.

Luley also revealed that 12 Irish residents have died at Dignitas since 2003, while approximately 100 Irish people are currently members of the organisation. The membership fee for “accompanied suicide” is 2,500 Swiss Francs (around 2,600 euro), but the full service, including funeral and administrative arrangements, costs more than 11,500 euro plus VAT.

During his address to the Joint Oireachtas Committee, Luley emphasised Dignitas’ philosophy: “The core thing really is to install a system of maximum freedom of choice and at the same time education for the public and education for the healthcare system and healthcare professionals so they learn how to deal with and how to listen to wishes of people who say "I do not want to continue living". We must change the culture via education in the direction of making the base layer so that people can come forward and whatever the reason may be for them to say "I want to end my own life, I want to die and I want to use suicide", they are being met at eye level and from there on, there is discussion around what is there in terms of solutions towards reinstalling quality of life, to bring them back on track to enjoy life and have a good quality of life, and if that is not possible to make it possible that these people can have a professional way out of their suffering, which is assisted dying.” 

Members of the Dáil who will vote on the Report next month must recognise that once assisted suicide or euthanasia is legalised, it becomes difficult to maintain strict limitations. The experiences of other countries, along with discussions at the recent international conference, demonstrate that there will be continual pressure to further liberalise these laws. To prevent such escalation, the Report must be firmly rejected.

 

P. S.

A prominent pro-euthanasia campaigner in Ireland is Tom Curran from Exit International. Exit International was previously a member of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies but left in 2021. While the Federation prefers a medical model regulated by legislation, Exit International believes euthanasia and assisted suicide are fundamental human rights. They argue that any mentally competent adult should have access to these options without needing to meet any medical criteria, and that healthcare professionals should not be required to participate.

The controversial content of an SPHE textbook for young teenagers

Last week, a publisher issued an apology for the stereotypical portrayal of an Irish family in a textbook. The volume, which was withdrawn following public outrage, was produced for the new Junior Cycle course on Social, Personal, and Health Education (SPHE) introduced last year by the Department of Education.

A closer examination of these SPHE textbooks reveals even more serious concerns. One such example is “My Wellbeing Journey”, a text from a major publisher, authored by prominent SPHE teachers.

One of the authors is Eoghan Cleary, Assistant Principal at Templecarrig Secondary School, Co. Wicklow, who is often invited to comment on sex education on radio and television.

The second volume of “My Wellbeing Journey”, aimed at students aged 13–14, includes a lesson dedicated entirely to masturbation. In one of the exercises, labelled a "pairs activity", students are presented with images of eleven animals and asked to guess, together with their classmates, how many of these animals engage in masturbation. This activity is undeniably shocking, yet the book is freely available online for anyone to verify: https://online.flippingbook.com/view/814709122/128/#zoom=true

Is animal behaviour really a good guide to human behaviour? Humans have reason and a moral sense. Animals do not.

Young students are also told that “Even babies and young children know it feels good to touch their own genitals.” This appears to be presenting babies and toddlers as sexual beings.

Another author of “My Wellbeing Journey” is Pam O’Leary, an SPHE teacher at Cork Educate Together secondary school.

In an interview about sex education some years back, Pam O’Leary stated: “I’m interested in teaching students about safety and health. Morality shouldn’t come into Relationship and Sex Education. It’s not about what students should do in any moral sense”. Would most parents agree with this view?

Accordingly, the “My Wellbeing Journey” textbook makes no direct reference to moral values, focusing instead on the concepts of ‘healthy boundaries’ and ‘safe spaces’. It suggests that choices and behaviours are acceptable as long as they are deemed "healthy and safe". However, it is impossible to teach human relationships and sexuality without referencing ethical principles. Human beings inherently base their decisions on values and principles.

Even more perplexing is the attempt to use animal behaviour as evidence that certain actions are normal or natural. Animals are driven by biological imperatives and instinct, whereas humans are free to act according to what they believe is right and just. Forced copulation or aggressive mating, for example, is not uncommon in the animal kingdom but the authors, obviously, do not mention this in their chapter about consent because we are more than animals, we are moral beings. So why do they cover masturbation among animals in a textbook for young teenagers?

The textbook also makes no mention of marriage, which is perhaps unsurprising given that the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, with the blessing of the Department of Education, removed references to marriage and parenting from the SPHE curriculum.  

Textbooks and teachers are granted a certain degree of flexibility in covering topics outlined in the NCCA curriculum, nonetheless, there is no promotion of commitment or long-term relationships. These concepts are never presented as preferable to casual or short-term relationships. Instead, the message remains: it is all acceptable if it is "healthy and safe". Again, what do parents think?

Unsurprisingly, the curriculum includes lessons on "gender identity", which is presented as fact rather than as a contested ideology that separates being male or female from biological reality. The volume is so steeped in gender ideology that some of the expressions used sound ridiculous.

For example, in the section on puberty in Volume 3, the authors say: “Most typically, people with female-typical anatomy generally begin puberty at 11 years of age, and those with male-typical anatomy begin at 12 years of age”.

Girls are thus referred to as “people with female-typical anatomy”, and boys, of course, as “those with male-typical anatomy”. These convoluted expressions are used in the name of ‘inclusivity’, as, according to gender ideology, not all individuals with female-typical anatomy are women.

They are whatever ‘gender’ they identify as and remember, nobody knows how many genders exist.

Many parents likely disagree with this gender ideology. Are they aware that it is now the dominant philosophy framework taught in SPHE classes?

Are they aware of what else is in these SPHE textbooks, and also the key aspects of life that are missing?